Benjamin Franklin's 13 virtues

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin#Thirteen_Virtues

by ColinWright • 14 years ago

101 73 14 years ago

en.wikipedia.org

oofabz• 14 years ago

If you like these you might also enjoy my rules of life:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Foobaz

asparagui• 14 years ago

you need an addendum about awesome shirts :3

SonicSoul• 14 years ago

i have a document that i've compiled over the years, that i try to look over every morning. It has a list of quotes/maxims and daily habits.

tried publishing it out: https://writer.zoho.com/public/07e664bb675348bd84c355190c36c...

funny but i forgot i had Ben's 13 already added :) i guess it doesn't work if it gets too big for a daily brief.

billswift2• 14 years ago

My Quotes and Aphorisms file is over a megabyte, it's been growing for 16 years. I formatted it so that the fortune-cookie program can pull up quotes at random, or I can search it with various keywords whenever I want.

rodly• 14 years ago

Only one I disagree with is #12, "Chastity. Rarely use venery but for health or offspring, never to dullness, weakness, or the injury of your own or another's peace or reputation.", this is breaking his own moderation virtue and is heavily motivated by social pressures on sex.

dkhenry3• 14 years ago

I don't think so. I think he is making a conscious decision to limit something in his life that is not necessary, and that he might find as a distraction. Sexuality for all its enjoyable qualities can be a distraction to the best of us, and there is nothing wrong with taking an attitude towards it that says I will limit something that is good and I enjoy for something I perceive to be better.

shortlived• 14 years ago

    that is not necessary,

If more people had more (safe) sex, the world would be a better place.

rvkennedy• 14 years ago

Technology is the chief driver of social mores. In Franklin's time, too much sex would likely expose you to health hazards such as syphilis, or unwanted babies. Today, we have medicine and contraception that should minimize these risks. But I think this point still applies - it just depends on your definition of "rarely"... no more than twice a day perhaps!

jcromartie• 14 years ago

I think "for health" covers it. The admonition "never to dullness, weakness, or ... injury ..." is being rediscovered en masse over here: http://reddit.com/r/nofap

stephengillie5• 14 years ago

Many people express this fetish for delaying gratification, but it's not for everyone. It's cute to see people getting into it and thinking the rest of us should go without.

mediacrisis• 14 years ago

That one threw me too. Especially since I was under the impression that chastity was not his main concern in Paris... but then again, that's Paris ;)

colmvp• 14 years ago

Maybe he learned something after frequenting brothels (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/20...) and siring an illegitimate son in his youth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Franklin).

keppy3• 14 years ago

He always had high ideas about chastity but seldom followed them. In my mind Franklin has always embodied "Do as I say, not as I do"--almost in a mischievous or humorous way. I think he did learn from his actions, but not in the same way we usually think of someone "learning" from their actions. He always knew the right answers but preferred to have a little fun.

brittohalloran• 14 years ago

Definitely some puritan influence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puritanism)

keppy3• 14 years ago

Puritanism influences everyone. But Franklin was no puritan, and to assume that the beliefs of puritans were the basis for his tips on chastity adds no real insight to this discussion. Anyone can easily identify ideals in our present and past that seem adverse to liberal sexuality and cry "Puritan!"--but this discounts the brilliance of people like Franklin. He had a high level view of the different ideals in his culture and often addressed them with a tongue-in-cheek or satirical tone.

djt• 14 years ago

Back then you couldn't just take a pill to get rid of any diseases you might pick up.

jackfoxy• 14 years ago

At least one other commenter picked up on for health. It wasn't something people wrote down back in those days, (I don't have a citation) many people then considered complete sexual abstinence unhealthy. So Franklin is saying you should engage often enough to maintain health; and Franklin was no prude, his oldest son was illegitimate, and so was that son's son, William Temple, who Franklin more or less adopted, and who returned the favor by collecting and publishing Franklin's papers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Temple_Franklin

Evbn4• 14 years ago

How is "have sex as needed for your health" in opposition to moderation?

dkhenry3• 14 years ago

Reminds me of the Greek Cardinal Virtues[1] , or The Resolutions of Johnathon Edwards[2]. It seems that is modern society we have failed to explicitly pass the importance of these kind of character qualities to our kids.

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardinal_virtues 2. http://www.apuritansmind.com/the-christian-walk/jonathan-edw...

mike-cardwell2• 14 years ago

Why do you think we've failed in this respect? People always automatically assume that things were better in the past and that the current generation is ruining things.

Maybe we're succeeding at passing on these character qualities to our kids at a higher rate than at any time in the past? There were thieves and liars and murderers and lazy people and scum bags 200 years ago too.

dkhenry3• 14 years ago

I say we failed because I don't see many adhearents to this. We don't live in a society of prudence, justice, restraint and fortitude. I also don't know of any explicit planing to pass these on to our kids explicitly. We might _hope_ they pick up a few of them along the way, but do we as a society actively try to teach our kids these things ?

And I am not saying what you personally as a parent do. As I know that I plan on explicitly trying to teach moral principles to my kids, but I don't think we as a society teach them.

expralitemonk3• 14 years ago

Our society decided there's no survival value in living a virtuous life: saving money for a rainy day, delaying gratification. This is unfortunate because the word virtue used to mean excellence and valor.

batista6• 14 years ago

>Maybe we're succeeding at passing on these character qualities to our kids at a higher rate than at any time in the past?

Not judging by the behaviour people one sees in any major city, or their kids, compared to historical norms of behaviour one can read about in history books.

One small example: attitude and rudeness like you see today from high-schoolers, would be totally unfathomable in a 1930 or 1950's school.

>There were thieves and liars and murderers and lazy people and scum bags 200 years ago too.

Sure. That doesn't mean societies are stationary. They change with the prevalent motives of the era, the changed ethical norms, the economic and political situation, etc.

stephengillie5• 14 years ago

These virtues lead to a dull and unfulfilling life in today's society. Many will ignore these tenants and behave badly out of boredom. But they sure do sound good, especially in a list like that. I'd argue that these values aren't necessary to most people today in that the value doesn't solve a problem the person has.

Don't forget that Jesus went around defying elders and authorities. Do you want your kids to have that type of humility?

lifeformed• 14 years ago

Everything in moderation, including moderation. I think these virtues are a good rubric for your general lifestyle, but no one is saying you have stick to them every waking moment.

username3• 14 years ago

How did Jesus defy elders and authorities?

keiferski• 14 years ago

Not to get all relativistic[0], but the primary reason we don't actively instill these values is because we no longer look to classical Greco-Roman society for inspiration.

Variously throughout history (Renaissance, Neo-Classical era - Franklin's time, etc.) society has upheld ancient values as the highest. In modern times, they've largely been replaced by scientific values. This was a big debate around Darwin's time (replacing the classical "liberal education" in Latin and Greek with modern scientific study.) It's also increasingly prevalent today, as universities are basically just for career-preparation. The dominant metric when evaluating universities is almost always "earnings following graduation".

[0] I don't necessarily agree or disagree with Classical values, but I do think we should sit down and make our own decisions, rather than blindly do it because Franklin/Plato/etc. says so.

expralitemonk3• 14 years ago

Ben Franklin was a hacker god. He visited Europe by ship and instead of curling up with a book on deck, he grabbed a thermometer and a notebook and discovered the Gulf Stream.

narag• 14 years ago

But did he invented something to slay vampires?

Seriously, I'm amazed at the width of his accomplishments. Maybe, tt would be difficult for someone today to significantly contribute to so many fields. Even in a relatively new profession like CS, we tend to specialize.

pcl• 14 years ago

> Even in a relatively new profession like CS, we tend to specialize.

I suspect that this is exactly the challenge. From what I know of him, Franklin did not specialize. Was that the nature of who he was, or an artifact of the time? And, of course, what about the survivor bias? We probably wouldn't hold Franklin in such high regard if he had only excelled in one of the many areas that he's known for.

There are scientific names throughout history who shared Franklin's love of discovery. da Vinci, Pasteur, Einstein and Feynman all come to mind immediately. Who from our generations will join that list? I bet that whoever does will also have a broad set of accomplishments.

expralitemonk3• 14 years ago

Part of Franklin's success was his ability to focus on big problems instead of using his energies gambling, drinking, or wenching. Franklin's moral principles had nothing to do with being holier-than-thou. He wanted a life of meaning, and his moral code was the means to the end: a life as a world-famous scientist, businessman, author, and diplomat.

His autobiography explains his motivations (a wonderful book): http://www.gutenberg.org/files/148/148.txt

Edit: Men like Franklin see their moral code as a tool to get from point A (a humdrum life) to point B (a life of significance.) Today we see a moral code as some kind of legal document and look for violations. Aha! I see that you violated Section B Paragraph 5 "No wenching during business hours."

phren0logy2• 14 years ago

Just a thought: The modern vilification of hypocrisy strikes me as a step backward in one way - it makes people feel bad about having high ideals they can't always meet.

vacri• 14 years ago

It's not hypocrisy if you strive to meet your goal and fail. It's only hypocrisy if you demand it of others but don't bother yourself.

phren0logy2• 14 years ago

I'm thinking of criticism like, "You say that you think moderation is important, but you don't always act that way. Are you some kind of hypocrite?"

ArbitraryLimits• 14 years ago

Hypocrisy is the tribute vice pays to virtue.

billswift2• 14 years ago

Not necessarily. With widespread vices like religious faith, it's the other way around.

daeken• 14 years ago

My favorite quote from The Diamond Age is relevant:

> You know, when I was a young man, hypocrisy was deemed the worst of vices,” Finkle-McGraw said. “It was all because of moral relativism. You see, in that sort of a climate, you are not allowed to criticise others-after all, if there is no absolute right and wrong, then what grounds is there for criticism? … Now, this led to a good deal of general frustration, for people are naturally censorious and love nothing better than to criticise others’ shortcomings. And so it was that they seized on hypocrisy and elevated it from a ubiquitous peccadillo into the monarch of all vices. For, you see, even if there is no right and wrong, you can find grounds to criticise another person by contrasting what he has espoused with what he has actually done. In this case, you are not making any judgment whatsoever as to the correctness of his views or the morality of his behaviour-you are merely pointing out that he has said one thing and done another. Virtually all political discourse in the days of my youth was devoted to the ferreting out of hypocrisy.

dredmorbius• 14 years ago

Thanks. Love that line.

It also captures one of the (IMO) underappreciated elements of Stephenson: he takes up technology, but is hugely interested in how it interacts with both individuals and society at large.

philwelch• 14 years ago

Tall poppy syndrome, really.

tomrod2• 14 years ago

>"Silence. Speak not but what may benefit others or yourself; avoid trifling conversation."

I disagree with this one. Small talk can lead to big happenings, and have many times in my life.

That being said, I'd modify it to: Focus. Avoid multitasking so as to not do multiple things poorly.

ChrisBanner• 14 years ago

Semantically speaking, I don't think you have to disagree with this. Small talk and trifling conversation are not necessarily one in the same. "Trifling" implies that there is little value. Small talk may in fact have great value if it helps to forge connections that pay off later.

tomrod2• 14 years ago

Sure, you have a point here. How does one know whether the talk will be small or trifling beforehand?

ralfd• 14 years ago

I thought the same. Even if Franklin was not a puritanic protestant, I guess a bit of strict ethics rubbed off.

Also these "Top 10 of best virtues ever!!1" were always constructed by male philosophers and lack stuff like "Sociability, "Care", "Empathy" or "Compassion".

gizzlon• 14 years ago

Sure, men in general probably have a greater tendency towards other virtues, but do you really mean to imply that men often lack stuff like "Sociability, "Care", "Empathy" and "Compassion" ?

Didn't a lot of "the big ones" talk about love? I think that encapsulates those values.

Gormo4• 14 years ago

Not surprising re the influence of puritanism: despite being most associated with Philadelphia later in his life, Franklin actually grew up in Boston.

awakeasleep• 14 years ago

Sociability, care, empathy and compassion can all fall under the vague heading "benefit."

ygmelnikova• 14 years ago

Franklin was a prodigious inventor. Among his many creations were the lightning rod, glass armonica (a glass instrument, not to be confused with the metal harmonica), Franklin stove, bifocal glasses and the flexible urinary catheter. Franklin never patented his inventions; in his autobiography he wrote, "... as we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours; and this we should do freely and generously." -- Wikipedia

Benjamin Franklin's 13 virtues

Related Stories